Greg Stark <st...@mit.edu> writes: > But imnsho doing nothing is a bad idea. We should have long ago either > added WAL logging or removed the index type. We shouldn't have left a > foot-gun that large lying around for so long.
We can't remove the hash index type, nor move it to an extension, because it is the operator classes for the built-in hash index AM that tell the planner and executor how to do hashing for arbitrary datatypes. And we certainly do not want to give up hashing-based query plans, whatever you may think of hash indexes. We really oughta fix the WAL situation, not just band-aid around it. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers